Defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. Pedestrians who have violated road traffic Acts shall cross the road at which crosswalks, underground passages, overpasses and other road-crossing facilities are installed, and shall not violate them;

Nevertheless, around September 16, 2018, the defendant, even though the crosswalk was installed around the front of Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (Seoul Special Metropolitan City Gwangjin-gu) on September 23:03, the defendant did not cross the above road but cross the road without permission.

2. On September 16, 2018, the Defendant, at around 23:13, 2018, fell down on the face of the above E in the front of Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, when he was subject to a control from the border of the police box affiliated with the Seoul Mine-gu Police Station D police station D, which was under the influence of the above paragraph 1, due to the fact that he was crossingd without permission, as seen in the foregoing paragraph 1.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning traffic control and crime control by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement;

1. Each investigation report (Nos. 6, 9, and 10 once a year);

1. Application of the video CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes to the crime scene;

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (Interference with the performance of public duties), Article 157 Subparag. 1, Article 10(2) of the Road Traffic Act, and the selection of fines for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. In light of the contents and circumstances of the instant crime, such as spitation, etc., on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, on a police officer who conducts public duties, such as traffic control, etc., the crime’s nature is not negligible.

However, this case's act is against the defendant's wrong recognition of all of the crimes of this case, there is no same record, defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, degree of interference with the execution of official duties, etc.